As long as we stay focused with our CLF techniques, it shouldn’t matter how we train them to perfection. As far as within the CLF perameters I haven’t seen too much elbow and knee training, except when it comes to san shou now. No we don’t condition our elbows and knees the way we would our forearms with the 3 star blocks. And yes we would be better off if we did. Imagine your best sweep and how powerful it could be. now Imagine your sweep after being trained in Thai Style training Methods. The combo of clf mixed with thai training methods can be a deadly thing. its just we should look at how they do it, then work it out our ways. that is how we stay true to our systems.
We should be concerned with ourselves more than if we are doing our style, even our CLF looks different from the next, why not put more concern on winning the fight than if its this or that… The mentality of many of the old school fighters from south china and hong kong was if they won, fine, if they lost, training hard no matter how until they can win…
Sometimes that meant training under different sifu… When finding help, the question wasn’t what style should I use?.. Rather who is a good teacher and can help me fight better… There are only so many ways to really knee and elbow someone, and most crane stance (Single foot stance) are our knees, so the forms do have them, sometimes you need someone else to help interpret the meaning of the moves, or just think outside the box…
As far as kicks… I have never seen a spinning hook kick in a traditional kung fu form let alone a CLF form… I have seen Chen Yong Fa’s students do this… They also make sounds similar to Karate, maybe he has trained Karate before? Regardless, he is very good, especially for his age…
But really, take out the Shaw Brothers movie mentality, cause it will only slow you down…
When fighting especially in the ring, techniques will mostly be similar right? Straights, hooks, uppercuts, etc… We have the advantage with the swing strikes… But tactics and stradegy is where I see the difference, and that comes from good caoching…
One thing to remember is not whether we have certain strikes or moves, but the extent to which we train and condition those moves.
We may have the most amazing knee strike in the entire world. What is the use if we never practice and condition it like mad. That would be a waste.
Take a look at other systems and the weapons they utilize. Those would be the ones they are good at. Hell, if they train in those specific weapons more than you, that means they will be better with them than you.
How many Kung Fu players spend their time in the clinch. My Muay Thai sihing taught me the “knife” or diagonal cutting elbow, which was previously nonexistent in our CLF, at least in the 4 Elbows and our forms.
My boxing buddies helped show me some combinations which we never really had. My Sifu adopts training methods and strategies from other systems: one good example is a boxing routine, adapted to Choy Lay Fut, which include two straight punches, then two Fan Jongs. It looks different from the way boxers do theirs, but the methods of training is the same. Evolved. Changed.
The way we should be always evolving for the better, instead of getting caught in our own arrogance and sense of superiority.
Good post Sow Choy (and I’ve just read your fan article as well, so doubly well done ).
Another thing to bear in mind is that in modern martial arts teaching there seems to be an increasing shared vocabulary as it were. While short hand schools reject and deride it, many longhand schools now teach the full caveat of kicking techniques, just as there are certain joint locks and throws that seem to be ubiquitis now (show me a martial arts school that doesn’t teach goose-neck wrist lock, straight arm lock and hip throw these days). I think this is somewhat a mixture of what people expect and what works. I don’t see anything wrong with teaching hook kicks for example, it’s only a problem when your CLF class are doing lead leg hook kick - lead leg turning kick - back leg turning kick - spinning hook kick - jumping 360 spinning back kick with the front leg type combinations :eek:
Our 1st elbow, pie jahng is a diagonal cutting elbow, that is how both of my sifus describe it as a cutting motion…
As far as weapons, you are so right… Especially when you see a Northern stlist do a typical southern weapon or vice versa, example Butterfly knives being a typical southern weapon or the hook swords being more of a northern weapon, but I have seen countless systems do this… I myself have more than a handful of Northern sets that seem so much more intricate with the spear for example…
In our school we spend lots of time in the clinch… Especially for SanShou or any full contact, you know thats gonna happen… But in our family, LKH was very much focused on hand to hand fighting. It was important that his students be focused on being good at fighting. More than anything, he was most excited when fighting was the subject…
He was also open minded to training, use what works. Nice to hear you are using some boxing drills… With us we spend alot of time doing throws and submissions… I personally feel it is important to be comfortable in all areas in case you wind up there… My 1st time on the ground I tapped out in less than 10 seconds… What an eye opener… I didnt believe CLF had failed me, I believed I needed more training… Getting upset at CLF is like getting mad at your screwdriver when you are the one who messed up… Right???
I hope to meet some of you guys one day… And say hi to Fu Pow…
BTW, I trained in Muay Thai to get ready for competition. While CLF has knees and elbows in a traditional CLF class you don’t learn many “ring skills”. By ring skills I don’t mean different ways to strike the opponent but things like cutting off the ring and such. CLF is a kick @ss fighting method but Muay Thai fighters tend to have more ring experience. The kneeing and elbow(can’t use elbows in sanda anyways) are not really “superior” to CLF but the way they use them in COMPETITION may be better than the way we typically might use them for street fighting. Also unless your school has a seperate sanda program it’s a good bet you don’t spend much time in the clinch either. All things that should be addressed if you are going to fight in sanda.
“Can i still say i am strictly Choy Lee Fut?”
Knowledge of other fighting methods doesn’t somehow invalidate your CLF training.
Would you say someone wasn’t a real basketball player if they also knew how to play soccer?
“now Imagine your sweep after being trained in Thai Style training Methods”
Your sweep would be the same, your round kick might be different though. If you want to “train Thai style” hit the bag and thai pads. Nothing special about it during an hour thai training session you might throw up to 1000 round kicks. Imagine if you threw 1000 sau chois each time you trained. In order to change your sweep you need sports specific trining for your sweep. The Thai round kick training supports the structure of that move. Want a better sweep? Throw hundreds more sweeps against different targets (banana bag, Jong, no target etc)
Practice makes perfect.
P.s. Keep those pointless history/lineage debates out of here. :mad:
Everyone has good and valid points on this subject and i thank eveyone for their opinions.
I’m only asking the question more as a poll instead of a real serious question to see where most of your heads are at. In my experience I haven’t seen too many Clf schools specifically train elbows and knees, unless they fight in san shou. I personally don’t feel that borrowing other styles training methods and shaping it to train our clf way is wrong. The only thing is i have seen other systems claiming to be so and so, and then when you see them fight they look like kick boxing. I have always tried to stay within the clf realm. I want someone watching to say, he must be a clf student by the techniques thrown.
Evolution, with today in mind is the only way to further our systems for tomorrow.
I believe this is exactly why Tam Sam stayed with fighting techniques only huh?
Anyone up for a historical debate?..Just kidding.
check my webpage out again, added some more pictures and having fun with uploadingthem. i’ll slow down soon, but when it comes to the sigt, it is just for now until i get a real one up. but it does for now.
So I’m assuming that “no one in CLF” includes YOU. And if YOUR truth is partial…why is it necessary to “spread” it around as though it is the WHOLE truth?
In other words, if every version of the history is only partially true then what makes one version better than the other? Why should we believe any of them or try to disseminate any of them to more people? Maybe we’re spreading some truth but we’re also spreading an equal measure of lies and misinformation.
If we are relying purely on the information “handed down” for our history then there is a certain subjectivity that is always introduced…whether it be Futsan’s history or Chan Family’s history, etc.
Without some kind of objective verification of facts, the histories as we know them are totally dependent on how TRUTHFULLY people have been in their representation of them. If we go there then we’re one step away from personal attack about who is being more TRUTHFUL (ie so and so is lying to make money, etc.)
So its really a fruitless effort to discuss history unless we can come up with some objective information from DISINTERESTED parties or physical evidence that would verify or invalidate the facts as presented.
Since we’re talking about such a long time ago (no physical evidence), in a subset of Chinese culture that was largely undocumented (no objective information) it’s pointless.
So basically…what everyone else said… its a big waste of time to even discuss it.
So don’t spread the our story then. it’s not for you.
but it is for the people who are interested in knowing our history. therefore you can call me my number is available from the web, and you can discuss it here with me because you are ony one man, with gripes like yours.
i’m not going to argue with you, either spread it or don’t up to you. but i will, and thats that.
He’s coming in all late and after the fact. fu pow, the discussion was between clfnole and myself. you do notice how you were left out of the equation, right?
there is a reason for that, it was between a and b people, try “C”-ing your way out of this.
That is fine that you don’t care about the history, if so, why do you take the time and effort to speak your mind on something you have no interest in? Are you just bored? Are you mad that i have learned more about the Green Grass Monk than what is being said about him in the Hung Sing Lineage. Are you upset that he isn’t monk choy fook like the chan family said he is? What’s the matter? Why are you mad?
The chan family can do no better at the history than i am doing. they have no "Real Proof "of anything including that chan heung created 200 forms. We all know you are from the chan lineage fu pow, but you will not tread on the hung sing kwoon and our history.
The chan family say they have someone named Loong Gee Choy but there is no evidence that he ever existed? If you are going to believe that the chan family is on the money with their version of the history, then i am a bigger fool for being a hung sing student.
You may not care, fu pow, but there are others out there that will. and if i never spread our history, the later generations will be at a great loss, while you and the chan family will tell your little story and claim that chan heung was the only person who created clf. you can believe that. its okay. i won’t think of you any different. it’s not your fault.
im not the one arguing, or upset, i am only responding about what you said to me.
Firstly, this is a PUBLIC forum and it is assumed that what you post here is open to ANY member for comment or criticism at ANYTIME. If you don’t want your personal thoughts publicized or criticized then take it to Private Messages.
If you need help using Private Messaging I believe there is a help feature for the forum that might provide more info.
Secondly, since its obvious that you didn’t take the time or effort to really read my previous post, I’ll post it again below so you don’t have to waste any extra effort pressing the scroll button all the way on the other side of your browser.
Once you have read my post again I want you to take some time away from the computer, think about what I wrote, and then actually RESPOND to what I wrote , rather than going off on some half-baked tangent about what you THINK my intentions are.
Are you baked fu pow you need to be. being baked is a good thing.
Once again, why do you comment if you are not interested? why not just change the channel instead of watching the show and complaining that it is so boring.
you can say, think and feel however you please. it doesn’t affect me or what i’m doing in the least. In fact, if i wrote a book about it i’m sure you would buy it just to have it.
therefore, its all good. i just don’t know why you take the time to respond if you just ain’t interested. is it that you just don’t like me and want to battle me? do you have something pesonal against me young grasshopper?
i know this is a public forum, and if i was concerned what a bunch on nuts have to say about what i said, then i would not publish my thoughts at all. so i don’t care what is said about me. at all. no one can walk in my shoes, but me.
Look, I’m not gonna play the Fu-Pow-asks-a-question-and-Frank-asks-red-herring-question-to-avoid-Fu-Pow’s-question game.
Now I asked you a specific question in my original post.
Like the Zen monks do, I will distill my question into a easily repeatable mantra that you can say over and over to yourself (since you obviously don’t want to read my post.)
“Why do you want to spread YOUR version of history when you admit that it is only partially true?”
Read this over and over until you feel you can answer it in a non-defensive way and/ or enlightenment springs forth…which ever come first.
you have 1 of 2 choices, either to believe or not to believe, to answer your question.
if you feel that way, then tell the whole clf fraternity to shut down all the history, not just me. i’ll do it when the rest does. until then, my students want to know the history, so i tell them. if others want to know then i share it with them.
in a nationally recongnized book cai dezhong (tsai Te Chung) is recongnized as the chief founder of the hung mun society. we all know the hung mun still exists because of the big name tongs that still exist. the tongs are part of the hung mun. their secrets were discovered and their history is revealed. other big name elders know that cai dezhong is the GGM and even others from various systems not from clf know about GGM. so now he is not just a CLF character, now he is the founder of one of the biggest triads out there.
As a member of the hung sing kwoon, it makes sense when you see it from our point of view. the hung sing branch can breathe a little easier knowing the green grass monk played such a big part in the revolution and the hung society.
we all have heard of the hung society. now we can be proud, because the GGM was the head of it all.
To Sihing Fu-Pow > I’ve been trying to get people to stop debating history in this thread, instead making it purely technical-based. I would appreciate it greatly if you would honor my request of debating with hskwarrior, aka Sifu Frank on another thread or such, even better privately. Thanks and I’ll see you in class.
To Sifu Frank > Please ignore anyone’s flamebaits for a history war. If you MUST argue, PLEASE reply either privately, or make another thread. PLEASE. EVERY SINGLE CLF THREAD so far have had SERIOUS HISTORICAL ARGUMENTS in it. Please, I don’t want another one.
oh, and i’m spreading the History of the hung sing kwoon lineage which was founded by choy lee fut co-creator Jeong Hung Sing. Who’s partially true history are you referring to?
why are you still on this when your boy infrazael asked to drop it. you can call me if you like so we can discuss this.
i’ll answer your questions if you answer mine first.
I think that Fu Pow’s problem is that you’re pushing your own while universally deriding everyone else’s, despite it being impossible to prove one way or the other. Your “proof” contains a large amount of folklore, semi (or even entirely) mythical figures and historical discrepancies, as well as huge contradictions in your reasoning. All of this would be OK if you played fair, respected everyone else’s views and were willing to debate, but you don’t and you’re not, so people get a little narced.
misconceptions, universally deriding everyone else’s version, historical discrepancies, contradictions in my reasoning…Pls explain?
How do you know that i am pushing my own history and not what is the history according to the fut san hung sing branch? you say i am one many alone spouting nonsense, but you and fu pow are afraid to even consider our version because it would disrupt your worlds.
“No one, and I mean No One, can prove me wrong!!!” Neither can you prove the Hung Sing branch and our history wrong. AND THATS WHY YOU GET UPSET THAT WE TELL OUR STORY! yOU CANNOT PROVE MY RESEARCH ON THE GREEN GRASS MONK WRONG EITHER, IF YOU THINK YOU CAN DO SO EFFECTIVELY, DO IT ALREADY, WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR?
).
you need to be. being baked is a good thing.